At 06:05 PM 7/1/2002 -0700, you wrote:
>My stance is that it's a little of both. In a formal, artistic,
>and aesthetic sense, what is being sampled and how is certainly
>interesting, but in other ways it matters a LOT who is being
>sampled and who is doing the sampling, because there's often a
>power relationship involved.
My problem with this is that you are throwing in value judgements. Clouds
the issue a bit, dontcha think? Does it become a system where one only has
to pay to sample if they can afford to, and those who can't can do it for
free? Who decides who can pay and who cannot?
I still stick to the "good for the goose, good for the gander" type
thought-process, and feel that if it is right (legally and morally) in one
direction then it needs to be right in the other direction as well.
....
Jason
----------------------------------------------------
Rumori, the Detritus.net Discussion List
to unsubscribe, send mail to majordomoATdetritus.net
with "unsubscribe rumori" in the message body.
----------------------------------------------------
Rumori list archives & other information are at
http://detritus.net/contact/rumori
----------------------------------------------------
"It goes without saying that one is not limited to correcting a work or to integrating diverse fragments of out-of-date works into a new one; one can also alter the meaning of those fragments in any appropriate way, leaving the imbeciles to their slavish preservation of 'citations.'" - Guy Debord and Gil Wolman, 'Methods of Detournement'